Guild Wars 2

As title says. Its just too much of an advantage for the winning side, being able to treb so much of the surrounding area without any chance of retaliation. Trebs shouldnt be allowed to be build within a castle at all, it would be fairly easy to make it so.

Tts why SM is important. Though not as important as own keep. Ppl usually forget that, defending SM instead of own keep.

Fairly easy to make it so? Do you think coding is simply “Treb-0 (within castle)”?

What, so then it’s virtually impossible to siege a well fortified keep? Why do you think Arenanet placed towers, keeps and castles just within trebuchet range in the first place?

headdesk

Youniverse.4395:

Fairly easy to make it so? Do you think coding is simply “Treb-0 (within castle)”?

Consider that the system is already in place since you can’t siege within your starting points… it shouldn’t be difficult.

It’s good logical Tatics and if you don’t like them there do something about it don’t go crying to A-Net. This is PvP if you want easy go PvE.

That kind of prohibition doesn’t make any sense to me. The walls are meant to protect.

It’s kind of the whole point. You’re supposed to have the keeps be able to defend and attack each other so that losing something key is a big deal. Otherwise everything is just a pointless trophy.

Stonemist 3rd floor trebs cost 100 supply each. (24 silver or badges.)

Kill with a ballista which takes 30 supply.(10badges/silver.)

Not a hard or expensive way to kill enemy trebs. :x

Keep trebbing 100% benefits the winning side since they are able to defend SMC while trebbing.

Winning side doesnt need any more help than they already have.

Toggles.1783:

Consider that the system is already in place since you can’t siege within your starting points… it shouldn’t be difficult.

I’m not sure that’s entirely true. I could be mistaken, but I thought the current mechanic prevents any siege from being placed in your starting area. It may be more difficult for the developers to prevent a single type of siege engine from being deployed in an area.

To be frank, I think this is an intended mechanic. As someone else stated, there are a lot of towers that are just inside the range of a trebuchet. In addition, there are pads in Stonemist (as well as some of the towers/keeps in EB and the Borderlands) where the shape and size of the pad is perfect for a trebuchet.

Although I do agree and wish something was done so Stonemist would flip more often, taking it to begin with is a strategic advantage for whatever server that owns it. I don’t think we should diminish the reward for holding it.

In my opinion, you should not be looking at banning trebuchets from being placed in Stonemist. I think we should be looking at making Stonemist more of a centerpiece for conflict and more vulnerable to attack. The design of EB is like a game of king of the hill. It shouldn’t be easy holding the top of that hill. Give some sort of strategic advantage in the surrounding towers… additional defensive capabilities, a long range ballista instead of cannon, etc … but only if your server doesn’t hold Stonemist.

What.
Sorry but WTF are peeps whinging at.
Not only yesterday a guild from Gandara held the tower on the Gunners Hold Borderlands against the odd and numbers from 14:00 GMT till 06:30 GMT aprox with a combination of Siege and Guts, plus there was never more than 6 of us inside that tower at any one time and only one of us when it fell, simply because we are not robots and need sleep.
Yes if you place siege in the right place it can be a devastating defense but isn’t that what it’s all about using tactics as well as brute force.
The only reason it fell was because we are human and needed some sleep

I think most are unimpressed of walls being permanently down. I think a better suggestion would be that each shot would use some supply from the place it’s being shot from.

This would make supply camps more important and can eventually give a way to stop trebs from keeping walls down permanently. Maybe this will make keep/tower trebs be used more strategically rather then mindless firing.

How about you spend the energy coming up with the counter which is take SM. Treb it back. Simple

there is ONE castle stonemists but im sure you are referring to all kind of structures. usually when people try to take this they go in with at least 30 players and the gate go down fast if you cant build them inside there is NO way you can defend your pretty much doomed.

Aye. People moaning about their towers getting hit by trebs are daft IMO. Build your own and hit it back? If you do it right they won’t see your treb.

Stonemist can hit those surrounding towers. But likewise ALL of those surrounding towers can hit stonemist. It makes the outer wall of SM very vulnerable. Honestly the only point of the SM assault that tends to be tough is the centre. The inner wall can be but you can hit it from so many places. I am of course assuming a none enormous zerg defence.

there are plenty of effective counters to trebs inside objectives.

Youniverse.4395:

Fairly easy to make it so? Do you think coding is simply “Treb-0 (within castle)”?

Nah it’s much easier, just tell a map designer to place siege blocking trigger zones inside all keeps and jumping puzzles, just like those in the spawn, job done, no additional code written! If you’re inside the trigger zones, you can’t place siege, simple check that is already in the game, so no code needs to be written. Anyone can place the trigger zones, could tell your 12yo nephew to do it. At least that would be the case if I wrote the code :P

But I disagree, placing trebs inside of keeps is the whole point :P What should perhaps be changed is the ability for one keep to bombard another, yeah that should probably be addressed.

dirtyklingon.2918:

there are plenty of effective counters to trebs inside objectives.

So what’s your counter to 4 trebs placed on the edge of the borderland garrison, bombarding the north east gate of the Bay fortress, short of taking said garrison?

The ones in spawn do not differentiate which type of siege is placed. It blocks all siege. Additional code would have to be written. Would it be hard? Maybe not, but I am pretty sure there are way more important issues a programmer is dealing with atm.

zerospin.8604:

dirtyklingon.2918:

there are plenty of effective counters to trebs inside objectives.

So what’s your counter to 4 trebs placed on the edge of the borderland garrison, bombarding the north east gate of the Bay fortress, short of taking said garrison?

part of this kind of pvp, of traditional old school mmo pvp(as opposed to the wow era of fps mode maps for mudflated gear) is strategy, and figuring out foryourself, or as a guild or alliance, how to counter w/e your enemy has upped the ante with.

so while i’m not interested in giving you the answer you want, i will teach you how to get such answers:

brainstorm among your guildies or among your alliance’s tacticians and be creative, be willing to risk being wrong about things, think outside the box, and don’t give up(but know when to retreat).

the answer may not always be obvious, but asking devs to nerf this or that or hold your hand in any way is never the answer in this style of pvp.

once devs start holding our hands, wvw becomes another wow arena carebear kumbiyah festival, which we can find in any number of wow clones easily enough already.

Katsumoto.9452:

Aye. People moaning about their towers getting hit by trebs are daft IMO. Build your own and hit it back? If you do it right they won’t see your treb.

Stonemist can hit those surrounding towers. But likewise ALL of those surrounding towers can hit stonemist. It makes the outer wall of SM very vulnerable. Honestly the only point of the SM assault that tends to be tough is the centre. The inner wall can be but you can hit it from so many places. I am of course assuming a none enormous zerg defence.

You cant counter treb a treb that is built on the balconies of SMC. If you are undermanned then you cant take SMC so whenever you take one of your keeps back, the wiining side will break down in the wall in 5 minutes and they run back and take it.

zerospin.8604:

So what’s your counter to 4 trebs placed on the edge of the borderland garrison, bombarding the north east gate of the Bay fortress, short of taking said garrison?

You can kill them with your own siege outside of the garrison. This is a standard tactic. Granted, if you’re outmanned this probably isn’t going to work. But in that case, they could probably just storm the Bay and you’d be screwed either way.

Galrukh.6532:

Katsumoto.9452:

Aye. People moaning about their towers getting hit by trebs are daft IMO. Build your own and hit it back? If you do it right they won’t see your treb.

Stonemist can hit those surrounding towers. But likewise ALL of those surrounding towers can hit stonemist. It makes the outer wall of SM very vulnerable. Honestly the only point of the SM assault that tends to be tough is the centre. The inner wall can be but you can hit it from so many places. I am of course assuming a none enormous zerg defence.

You cant counter treb a treb that is built on the balconies of SMC. If you are undermanned then you cant take SMC so whenever you take one of your keeps back, the wiining side will break down in the wall in 5 minutes and they run back and take it.

Why counter treb it?
I mean if you can use 10badges or silver, and 30 supply, why choose to use a treb to take it out and waste more money/badges/supply.

I mean so what if a treb can’t be trebbed back, use something like a ballista. (It’ll even shoot quicker, and if people come to attack you, you can shoot them too.)

You can take out trebs on upper deck SM really easy.

Mishi has already told you a few tricks.

There is almost no treb spot that cannot be countered by either AoE or with well placed, quickly built siege.

Trust me, I have spent at least 10g trying to find that perfect un-hittable spot to drop my trebs so far and have not found one yet (still working on it :p).

Any motivated team can quickly take em down fast.

I guess that’s the trick, though; getting 3+ people to work together and do what needs to be done.

Ok so building a balista is a workable solution you say. How long does it take from you put down that build plan till the treb is dead ?

Not to long:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y972JOjlYOk&feature=share&list=UUyDMm3VdBofVoaiokZ4Vg8A
You can see the mesmer with the blueprint @ 1:45, you can view how fast the ballista took to build, and start shooting. I think it took us a maximum total of 30seconds? (Incluing building the ballista)

@fixit

I know one perfect place for my trebs. Even trebs from SM can’t hit it, and I destroy the wall of SM easily.

Avalon.4809:

@fixit

I know one perfect place for my trebs. Even trebs from SM can’t hit it, and I destroy the wall of SM easily.

I’d like to know where you place the treb, and see how it stands to my inability to let enemy siege stand without killing it. (If talking about QL their mortars can kill it, DG/WC/ect… trebs can, and so on.)

>.> Believe me, I will find ways to destroy any siege someone places against my server. I don’t even mind breaking my gear to break their siege either.

Galrukh.6532:

Keep trebbing 100% benefits the winning side since they are able to defend SMC while trebbing.

Winning side doesnt need any more help than they already have.

Actually SM is both a boon and a curse. On one side you get points, a nifty shiny, a central fortified location, and the ability to treb the surrounding areas. On the other side both server almost always end up attacking it together.

Big lesson here, SM runs on supplies. Without supplies SM falling is inevitable. You have SM issues? Do everything you can to kill it’s supplies. Take vital supply camps and kill dolyaks. Take out mortars and cannons (repairs take supplies), siege it if you safely can from anywhere. Hit gates without any intention of actually sieging just to make them repair. Etc. Once you burn through their supplies a gate or wall coming down is inevitable.

Keep in mind that the other server is likely doing many of these things to SM as well. Keep on eye on SM supplies and fighting near it. If SM is an issue and the other server is hitting one side of SM then hit the other.

SM is indeed highly counter-able and difficult for any side to keep without an overwhelming advantage. If they have a big enough advantage to keep it permanently then SM isn’t why you are losing.

zerospin.8604:

So what’s your counter to 4 trebs placed on the edge of the borderland garrison, bombarding the north east gate of the Bay fortress, short of taking said garrison?

I’ve seen some people counter with ballistas, but they are hit and miss based on obstruction. I personally countered 3 trebs at once with an arrow cart built almost touching the cliff underneath. A bit tricky but just barely reaches.
Viewing and targeting is a kitten though.

Your imagination lacks young one.

I placed 2 more trebs have fun.

Stop repairing. and ill get off this treb! thanks :P
otherwise enjoy the repairs!

Just thought u guys might like this
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/132/gw001mw.jpg/